↓ Skip to main content

Vascularized Thoracodorsal to Suprascapular Nerve Transfer, a Novel Technique to Restore Shoulder Function in Partial Brachial Plexopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Vascularized Thoracodorsal to Suprascapular Nerve Transfer, a Novel Technique to Restore Shoulder Function in Partial Brachial Plexopathy
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2016.00017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shirley M. Potter, Scott I. Ferris

Abstract

We describe the clinical outcome of a novel nerve transfer to restore active shoulder motion in upper brachial plexus injury. The thoracodorsal nerve (TDN) was successfully used as a vascularized donor nerve to neurotize to the suprascapular nerve (SSN) in a patient with limited donor nerve availability. At 4 years follow-up, he had regained useful external rotation of the injured limb, with no significant donor site morbidity. Shoulder abduction return was less impressive, however, and reasons for this are discussed. We provide a comprehensive review of the literature on this topic and a subsequent discussion on the details of this novel technique. This is the first reported case of TDN to SSN transfer, and also the first reported case of a vascularized TDN transfer in the English language literature. We advocate direct thoracodorsal to SSN transfer as a valid surgical option for the restoration of shoulder function in patients with partial brachial plexus avulsion, when conventional nerve donors are unavailable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 25%
Unspecified 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 58%
Unspecified 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#13,110,611
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#319
of 2,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,022
of 299,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,881 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.